We all know them. We all hate them. They are generally overdone, completely biased, or so vague they border on the edge of pointlessness (or toppled over said edge). Yes, I'm talking about those "Is Linux ready for the desktop" articles. Still, this one is different.

I don't see anyone complaining because of Maya being a commercial application. Or Smoke. Or Houdini. Or Doom3, Quake4, Unreal Tournament, Darwinia, ET:QW and Prey.

Because they are Linux users and they do not know those things exist... But you can get Quake 3 on Linux. Secret Maryo Chronicles and Atari games.

What I do see on the other hand is people that wouldn't buy applications like NeroLinux, just because they offer nothing over other apps readily available from the repositories.

The "Linux users don't pay for software" is a lie.

No, it is not a lie, most Linux users do not understand the difference between open source and free.

Adobe and Filemaker, for example, once they made Linux apps, and gave up because people assumed they were free.

Someone who wants to run Maya will be as likely or unlikely to buy or pirate it no matter what OS he runs.

Don't assume everyone is a thief. Not only it is not polite, but is extremely inaccurate. Many people live on programming computers.

See, for example the AppStore for the iPhone.

The issue with Linux users is that we have a lot of software available for free in the repositories. Some of it is great, some is crap and the rest is somewhere in the middle, but if you want us to buy your software you'll have to offer something better than what we already have.

Most of Linux software is old software. Not old by date, but old in technologies. I have not found a single piece of software in Linux, that is not available for other platforms better. For example, GIMP is a joke if you compare it with Adobe Photoshop CS. GIMP is like Photoshop 4.

Even the same software for Linux when you see it Mac OS X or Windows, looks better, example: Adium (Pidggin) or OpenOffice.

Because they are Linux users and they do not know those things exist... But you can get Quake 3 on Linux. Secret Maryo Chronicles and Atari games.

You are indeed a funny troll. You know that this list was composed by programs/games that all run happily under Linux, right?

Well, it is true. Linux users only care about their precious servers. Those are the only things they know exists, but common Apps that desktop users use, like games and so on... They do not even bother.

Adobe and Filemaker, for example, once they made Linux apps, and gave up because people assumed they were free.

Adobe does not and has not EVER released their software for Linux except Acrobat Reader. Stop making lies to justify yourself.

Even the same software for Linux when you see it Mac OS X or Windows, looks better, example: Adium (Pidggin) or OpenOffice.

This one is just a plain strawman argument. I personally like more the looks of my Linux desktop than my Mac one, including OpenOffice and Pidgin. Just because you like some looks better than other doesn't mean it actually is better for everyone.

Notice how it mentions Linux in the supported platforms? And Maya sure is a professional app if anything.

Did you notice that Windows and Mac are also supported?

Did you see all the apps and games mentioned have Mac and Windows versions?

Tell me what is the benefit of using Linux on the Desktop? Something that is better than on the Mac or Windows?

Games are always better on Windows. Media Apps are always better on Mac.

Don't tell me is getting there, because that thing I have been hearing for the past 12 years.

Adobe and Filemaker, for example, once they made Linux apps, and gave up because people assumed they were free.

Adobe does not and has not EVER released their software for Linux except Acrobat Reader. Stop making lies to justify yourself.

Adobe had a bunch of products that run on UNIX (SIG and SUN, 1994-96), I saw it working (Illustrator and Photoshop), and the big plan was to port it to Linux, later. Linux was starting., but you know, Linux would be the future... But at the end, they did not do it because how Linux users were perceiving the whole free movement. Some people even asked for an old version, but Adobe said no. There was no warranty people would by the stuff.

And Filemaker, did the same thing, only they took a step closer releasing Filemaker Server for Linux and then, killing it, presumably, for the same thing.

Even the same software for Linux when you see it Mac OS X or Windows, looks better, example: Adium (Pidggin) or OpenOffice.

This one is just a plain strawman argument. I personally like more the looks of my Linux desktop than my Mac one, including OpenOffice and Pidgin. Just because you like some looks better than other doesn't mean it actually is better for everyone.

Look at the technology behind it. Double buffering like Mac OS X or Vista, no alpha channels, good fonts like Mac, nope. You can see even tearing the Windows when you drag them, because there is no double buffering.

It looks nice, yes it does, it looks like a computer of the 90s. Very BeOS.

No, it is not a lie, most Linux users do not understand the difference between open source and free.

And there you go talking about the impoliteness of assuming things about people.

Adobe and Filemaker, for example, once they made Linux apps, and gave up because people assumed they were free.

What apps? What did they offer that made them worth purchasing?

Don't assume everyone is a thief. Not only it is not polite, but is extremely inaccurate. Many people live on programming computers.

Read again what you quoted: I'm saying that whether you pirate or not depends on the person and not the OS you run.

There was a statement about Linux users not paying for software, and I just put the example of Photoshop: a Windows program which happens to be probably the most pirated application.

Most of Linux software is old software. Not old by date, but old in technologies. I have not found a single piece of software in Linux, that is not available for other platforms better. For example, GIMP is a joke if you compare it with Adobe Photoshop CS. GIMP is like Photoshop 4.

Even the same software for Linux when you see it Mac OS X or Windows, looks better, example: Adium (Pidggin) or OpenOffice.

Again I put an example: NeroLinux.
K3b gives the same functionality and then some more, so it's obvious that no one will pay for Nero.

Regarding Photoshop, the joke is buying an expensive professional software to resize and remove the red eyes from your weekend photos... but then again as you know most people (home users, that's it) don't pay for it, but rather pirate it.
Photoshop is not an app for home users, gimp is.

Whether you like better how an application looks on whatever OS is irrelevant, I'm talking about the reason why no one would pay for an application that offers nothing over the apps available from the repositories.

Most of Linux software is old software. Not old by date, but old in technologies. I have not found a single piece of software in Linux, that is not available for other platforms better. For example, GIMP is a joke if you compare it with Adobe Photoshop CS. GIMP is like Photoshop 4.

Even the same software for Linux when you see it Mac OS X or Windows, looks better, example: Adium (Pidggin) or OpenOffice.

Again I put an example: NeroLinux.
K3b gives the same functionality and then some more, so it's obvious that no one will pay for Nero.

NeroLinux... a clone of Nero...Do you really think that copying something is innovative? Tell me a Desktop app that is better in Linux than any other OS.

Nero appeared on Windows, like 10 years ago.

Regarding Photoshop, the joke is buying an expensive professional software to resize and remove the red eyes from your weekend photos... but then again as you know most people (home users, that's it) don't pay for it, but rather pirate it.
Photoshop is not an app for home users, gimp is.

Now GIMP is for home users... Photoshop Elements is also for home users, but it is usable, GIMP is terrible. GIMP is not for home users.